Hillary Clinton's popularity has plunged since election, poll finds

Kacper said:
Changing Administrations in the middle of a war and control of the government would have been seen as betraying the troops; Bush beat Gore because of the anti-Clinton sentiments to begin with. Bush wouldn't have lost.
Click to expand...

You don't know that,I don't know that,either way,Bushes second term was Hillary 's best chance and she didn't even try.
As for Gore,one he won,two he distanced himself from the Clinton's bad mistake!
 
Kacper said:
Changing Administrations in the middle of a war and control of the government would have been seen as betraying the troops; Bush beat Gore because of the anti-Clinton sentiments to begin with. Bush wouldn't have lost.
Click to expand...

Your information sounds like Fox anti-Clinton bullshit
 
aloysious said:
Wow, she had higher favorability than Trump before the election and still lost. And she's the dims' front runner for 2020 (I assume).
Looks like her campaign is going worse than the first two.
I've been saying the only way I vote for Trump in 2020 is if dims run someone as bad as hrc. And only hrc is as bad as hrc. Maybe hrc 3.0 is actually worse than hrc 2.0.
Click to expand...

Suit yourself, you'll get a cabal of Goldman Sachs execs in the white house, endless war, and the continued societal wealth extraction, concentration and redistribution "either" way, same as it ever was.
 
Mason said:
You don't know that,I don't know that,either way,Bushes second term was Hillary 's best chance and she didn't even try.
As for Gore,one he won,two he distanced himself from the Clinton's bad mistake!
Click to expand...

Because she would have lost. Funny that you acknowledge you don't know that and then claim to know that would have been her best shot. Incumbents seldom lose, and Bush had a 50-60% approval rating throughout the fall of 2004. http://news.gallup.com/poll/116500/presidential-approval-ratings-george-bush.aspx

Even New Yorkers preferred Bush over Clinton in that 2004 time frame http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/04/24/new-yorkers-prefer-bush-over-hillary-clinton-in-2004.html
 
Mason said:
Your information sounds like Fox anti-Clinton bullshit
Click to expand...

It is what the data shows. Your Hillary Could Haves/Should Haves are not supported by anything other than that you heart Hillary and can't accept that she got her arse handed to her twice.
 
Kacper said:
It is what the data shows. Your Hillary Could Haves/Should Haves are not supported by anything other than that you heart Hillary and can't accept that she got her arse handed to her twice.
Click to expand...

My post only are about when she didn't run,you can't seem to comprehend that.
 
Kacper said:
Because she would have lost. Funny that you acknowledge you don't know that and then claim to know that would have been her best shot. Incumbents seldom lose, and Bush had a 50-60% approval rating throughout the fall of 2004. http://news.gallup.com/poll/116500/presidential-approval-ratings-george-bush.aspx

Even New Yorkers preferred Bush over Clinton in that 2004 time frame http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/04/24/new-yorkers-prefer-bush-over-hillary-clinton-in-2004.html
Click to expand...

Clinton wasn't a candidate in 2004!
Using Fox as your source,how did I know!lol
 
Mason said:
Clinton wasn't a candidate in 2004!
Using Fox as your source,how did I know!lol
Click to expand...

Clinton was polled as a candidate in 2004 because people were trying to get her to join in the race, but obviously you did not look to see that this was an associated press story published on Fox's website. Since you have no facts, no data, and nothing to support your position except "I really wish Hillary had been President" there is nothing else to discuss with you. Bush outpolled Hillary even in the state that had elected her to the Senate in your magical Hillary would have won!!! castle. Bush's approval didn't start tanking until after 2004, as has been demonstrated. Tammy Duckworth has more legs to stand on than you at this point.
 
Kacper said:
Clinton was polled as a candidate in 2004 because people were trying to get her to join in the race, but obviously you did not look to see that this was an associated press story published on Fox's website. Since you have no facts, no data, and nothing to support your position except "I really wish Hillary had been President" there is nothing else to discuss with you. Bush outpolled Hillary even in the state that had elected her to the Senate in your magical Hillary would have won!!! castle. Bush's approval didn't start tanking until after 2004, as has been demonstrated. Tammy Duckworth has more legs to stand on than you at this point.
Click to expand...

I'm done discussing,we will have to agree to disagree,enjoy Hannity tonight
 
CFM said:
I'm not looking at it from the standpoint of chronological age but of the hypocrisy by those that said at 69 years, 11 months Reagan was too old yet at 69 years, 3 month Hillary wasn't too old.
Click to expand...

Women live longer than men. So yes. She is younger than daffy and a woman too.
 
If warren ran, she would be president now. She would have torn Daffy apart in debates. She is so much better qualified than Daffy Donald. So was Hillary ,though. Bernie and Biden's times have passed. Need to go younger.
 
aloysious said:
Wow, she had higher favorability than Trump before the election and still lost. And she's the dims' front runner for 2020 (I assume).
Looks like her campaign is going worse than the first two.
I've been saying the only way I vote for Trump in 2020 is if dims run someone as bad as hrc. And only hrc is as bad as hrc. Maybe hrc 3.0 is actually worse than hrc 2.0.
Click to expand...

The history books are going to say it was a disaster that the popular vote-losing Orange Hog was selected by the electoral college. And that the nation would almost have certainly been better served by someone experienced and capable, much like SOS Clinton.

In much the same way that the nation would have been better off if Hubert Humphrey had defeated Tricky Dick Nixon.

I mean, when you really think about the modern GOP, and their presidents Nixon, George Dumbya, Bedtime for Bonzo, and Trump, it is pretty much the norm - not the exception - that Republicans nominate criminals, dunces, and incompetents.
 
Cypress said:
The history books are going to say it was a disaster that the popular vote-losing Orange Hog was selected by the electoral college. And that the nation would almost have certainly been better served by someone experienced and capable, much like SOS Clinton.

In much the same way that the nation would have been better off if Hubert Humphrey had defeated Tricky Dick Nixon.

I mean, when you really think about the modern GOP, and their presidents Nixon, George Dumbya, Bedtime for Bonzo, and Trump, it is pretty much the norm - not the exception - that Republicans nominate criminals, dunces, and incompetents.
Click to expand...

I'm so happy hillary is my not president ! :smile:
 
Nordberg said:
Women live longer than men. So yes. She is younger than daffy and a woman too.
Click to expand...

That wasn't the argument, boy.

She got her ass kicked in the election to someone you lefties consider an idiot. If she can't be someone she and the rest of you left wingers consider an idiot, just how good of a job could she have done? Guess we'll never know will we.
 
Cypress said:
The history books are going to say it was a disaster that the popular vote-losing Orange Hog was selected by the electoral college. And that the nation would almost have certainly been better served by someone experienced and capable, much like SOS Clinton.

In much the same way that the nation would have been better off if Hubert Humphrey had defeated Tricky Dick Nixon.

I mean, when you really think about the modern GOP, and their presidents Nixon, George Dumbya, Bedtime for Bonzo, and Trump, it is pretty much the norm - not the exception - that Republicans nominate criminals, dunces, and incompetents.
Click to expand...

The history books are going to say Trump won 304 - 227 just like sports history will show the Eagles defeated the Patriots 41 - 33 despite the LOSERS getting more first downs, more total yards, less penalty yardage, more passing yards, and a higher yards/play average since the final score is all that matters.
 
Nordberg said:
If warren ran, she would be president now. She would have torn Daffy apart in debates. She is so much better qualified than Daffy Donald. So was Hillary ,though. Bernie and Biden's times have passed. Need to go younger.
Click to expand...

Do you think her false claims of native American heritage help her debate skills?
 
aloysious said:
Wow, she had higher favorability than Trump before the election and still lost. And she's the dims' front runner for 2020 (I assume).
Looks like her campaign is going worse than the first two.
I've been saying the only way I vote for Trump in 2020 is if dims run someone as bad as hrc. And only hrc is as bad as hrc. Maybe hrc 3.0 is actually worse than hrc 2.0.
Click to expand...


Wow ... I guess this means she going to lose.
 
evince said:
why did you trash him?
Click to expand...

You faux indignation of Soros being trashed is hilarious given the way you Trash our President Donald Trump.

Soros is a sleezy left wing lunatic shitbag, his money behind Merkel has destroyed the EU with a barrage of violent refugees. He continuously asserts himself into our politics via his organization

Anyone has a right to bash Soros that doesnt agree with his progressive left insane politics just like the left bashs everything on the right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top